By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - EA comments on Switch support, says most players also own a PS4/X1 and often play the publisher’s games on those platforms

Darwinianevolution on 04 August 2019
DonFerrari said:
mysteryman said:

I see where you went wrong.

I'll give the benefit of doubt to a company that have manage to stay open for so long and profitable and people that managed to reach CEO position in a company like that.

You want to claim they made a bad decision, be my guest, anyone can make them. But to claim they are dumb for not doing what you want is another thing. Would you have credentials to put they as dumb and you as bright?

The problem is that EA's choices for the last couple of years have been incredibly shortsighted. Nevermind the buying studios and closing them after drying up all of their talent, they've been doing that for decades now. But things like reducing their game output to a very small variety of genres, IPs ad releases per year, applying microtransactions and/or lootboxes to all of their important titles even though they are being threatened with legal regulation, and launching games in a considerably incomplete state are seeds that will grow and strangle the company once the microtransactions & lootbox bubble bursts. They have little to no safeguards if their business model falls apart.



You know it deserves the GOTY.

Come join The 2018 Obscure Game Monthly Review Thread.

Around the Network
LurkerJ on 04 August 2019

Wondering if it has anything to do with EA access.



KLXVER on 04 August 2019
LurkerJ said:
Wondering if it has anything to do with EA access.

I don't think so. They still supported the PS4 when Sony said no to it at first.



LurkerJ on 04 August 2019
KLXVER said:
LurkerJ said:
Wondering if it has anything to do with EA access.

I don't think so. They still supported the PS4 when Sony said no to it at first.

Suicidal not to support the PS4 when it's the only console selling in Europe (and Japan lol) with an audience that has an insatiable appetite for EA games, not to mention, EA still got their way with SONY eventually, a wise decision as next-gen is almost here & the cycle is about to reset, SONY no longer has the upper hand and it needs all the support it can get for PS5 to ensure a smooth transition. 

On the other hand, Nintendo has been historically disposable for EA and EA games has been historically disposable for Nintendo fans. Theoretically speaking, withholding EA games off the Switch until EA access is allowed would be a plausible bargaining technique, especially that EA financial stability has never relied on Nintendo platforms. 



Cobretti2 on 04 August 2019

Or I own the PS4 and don't play EA games at all because there is just so many other damn good games on the system lol.



 

 

Around the Network
DonFerrari on 04 August 2019
sethnintendo said:
DonFerrari said:

I'll give the benefit of doubt to a company that have manage to stay open for so long and profitable and people that managed to reach CEO position in a company like that.

You want to claim they made a bad decision, be my guest, anyone can make them. But to claim they are dumb for not doing what you want is another thing. Would you have credentials to put they as dumb and you as bright?

What's their awesome grand strategy?  Buy up studios for their IPs and dismantle the studio within five years? 

I'm not part of their senior management so I don't have their grand strategy. And if buying studios, drying it while racking profits is working for them...

Darwinianevolution said:
DonFerrari said:

I'll give the benefit of doubt to a company that have manage to stay open for so long and profitable and people that managed to reach CEO position in a company like that.

You want to claim they made a bad decision, be my guest, anyone can make them. But to claim they are dumb for not doing what you want is another thing. Would you have credentials to put they as dumb and you as bright?

The problem is that EA's choices for the last couple of years have been incredibly shortsighted. Nevermind the buying studios and closing them after drying up all of their talent, they've been doing that for decades now. But things like reducing their game output to a very small variety of genres, IPs ad releases per year, applying microtransactions and/or lootboxes to all of their important titles even though they are being threatened with legal regulation, and launching games in a considerably incomplete state are seeds that will grow and strangle the company once the microtransactions & lootbox bubble bursts. They have little to no safeguards if their business model falls apart.

Considering how good the predictions and analysis of VGC community is I would still consider EA management more competent than the opinion of users here.

EA at 1989 had a price per share of 0.45 reached a max of 141 last year and is at the moment hovering the 93 point. But generally with a upward trend. And also generally have delivered good earnings per share. Plus is considered a "Good to buy" by analysts.

So anyone that wants to claim EA is dumb I would like to show which successful company they manage to show they have the good management skills or just comment based on their feelings.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."